YellowKing wrote:Class warfare is a talking point of every Democratic politician I've ever seen. It's a game of turning people against one another based on socio-economic status.
I don't understand how you think that is one-sided. As has already been pointed out to you - the Republican party uses it's own artificial socio-economic status constructs to engage in the class warfare every bit as much as Democrats.
But that's just you moving the goal posts. We weren't talking about what Democrats do. We were talking about your assertion that Republicans *don't* do things like this, which is an absurd position to take.
YellowKing wrote:Democrats will have you think that because Republicans aren't actively attacking the wealthy, that they don't care about anyone else but the wealthy.
Democrats will have us think that, because Republicans demonstrate it constantly through their rhetoric and actions. The problem isn't that Republicans aren't actively attacking the wealthy. The problem is that they actively advocate for the wealthy, at the expense of everyone else - under the absurd guise that they are helping everyone else become rich.
YellowKing wrote:When in fact, Republicans are simply not engaging in socio-economic class categorization at all.
You're better than this. Of course they are. They do it all the time. I'll give you the perfect example in a second.
YellowKing wrote:The real irony is that multi-millionaire Democratic politicians have somehow convinced people that they are a magical exclusion to that "wealthiest 1%" even as they vote for pay raises every year and fly around on their corporate jets.
Keep in mind that me criticizing Republican politicians does not equate to me defending Democatic politicians.
YellowKing wrote:You're complaining about capitalism, not conservatism.
No, I'm complaining about how politicians (at this moment in time, primarily Republicans) artificially rig our capitalistic system to favor one particular group of players, at the expense of the others.
It wasn't "capitalism" that let the Pharmaceutical Industry write Medicare Part D. That was Republicans.
YellowKing wrote:Redistribution of wealth is not the answer to everybody not having the same opportunity.
And there you have it. The favored Republican artificial construct in the ongoing "class war". As has already been pointed out to you - if the federal government is all about wealth redistribution, all evidence available points to them redistributing it from the 99% to the 1%.
Every year that goes by, the gap widens. If the federal government is a massive redistribution of wealth machine, why isn't the wealth gap shrinking? Why is it accelerating in the opposite direction?
YellowKing wrote:Taking from people who worked hard and giving it to people who didn't is not a solution.
Wait, I thought that Republicans didn't engage in broad stereotypes and socio-economic warfare?
What the F do you think you are doing there with that comment?
The federal government isn't taking from people who worked hard and giving it to people who didn't. And no one is suggesting that. The federal government is taking from the only people that have money (how do you take money from people that don't have any?), and using it to provide barely adequate services to people who mostly work hard (and in many cases, harder than those who are "successful").
This whole "wealth redistribution" angle is such complete bullshit. Most of your tax money is spent on three things: defense, social security and medicare. How can you say with a straight face that the federal government is a wealth redistribution engine?
Despite no evidence of wealth redistribution actually occuring.
YellowKing wrote:Giving people no incentive to work because the government will hand them everything they need for free is not a viable long-term solution.
Thanks for my daily dose of anti-communism propaganda. It's probably a good thing that no one is suggesting that we hand "them" (who are "them" if you aren't engaging in socio-economic based class warfare?) everything they need for free.
YellowKing wrote:While nobody will ever have the same opportunity, we can strive to give everyone as much opportunity as possible.
We *could*. We *don't*.
YellowKing wrote:Right. Which is why we should strive to give as many people as many opportunities as possible.
We should. Maybe you shouldn't be supporting a party that isn't doing any of that.
YellowKing wrote:Nobody is arguing that where we are today is the perfect jumping off point for everyone to have the exact same opportunity.
No, you made the broad statement that people aren't successful because they don't work hard enough at.
YellowKing wrote:What, generalizations against the Republican party are OK but generalizations against the Democratic party aren't?
You were alleging that Republicans don't make broad and inaccurate generalizations. Trying the "Democrats do it too!!" angle isn't going to win you any points there.
YellowKing wrote:News flash. Democrats lay off people too! That's a function of capitalism and economics, not politics. And guess what? Those evil corporations that Republicans advocate hire and provide paychecks for FAR more people than they lay off.
Yes, those evil corporations hire more people than they lay off. That has nothing to do with the point. The point was simply that there is a very real reason why "they" think that Republicans are "evil", because they very publically advocate for "the Man", that has been routinely crushing families finacially over the past few years.
Going back to the example set by my previous employer, by the 10th round of layoffs, the "survivors" stopped feeling "lucky" to still have a job, and resented management nearly as much as those that were let go. It didn't matter that management was still giving us (part of) our paychecks. The stress of coming to work everyday, wondering if it would be your last, never seemed worth it.
In other words, it's been a long time since "provide me with a tiny paycheck relative to the amount of money my work is actually generating for you" was enough to overcome the downside of watching your friends lives get bodyslammed financially for no other reason than a previous manager happened to assign you to the wrong project.
YellowKing wrote:No, it has to do with capitalism and economics. Bad stuff happens to good people. Life sucks.
At least you are starting to acknowledge that.
YellowKing wrote:It's not the fault of Republicans that businesses want to make money.
I didn't blame it on Republicans. I blamed it on the current Corporate Culture. But most importantly, I took blame off of the people that you explicitly blamed (the employees that got laid off), who are the people that are apparently having massive amounts of wealth redistributed to them.
YellowKing wrote:Yeah, but why are you blaming only Republicans?
I'm not blaming Republicans. I'm pointing out that you were blaming the people that get forced into shitty circumstances. And I'm blaming Republicans for fostering that nonsense in you as a way to turn you against "them" when it comes time to vote.
YellowKing wrote:Why aren't you blaming wealthy Democrats flying around in their corporate jets?
Because Democrats aren't broadly blaming the unemployed for being unemployed. They haven't turned that asinine concept into a plank of their Party platform.
YellowKing wrote:Why are you still buying appliances and cars from corporate America instead of growing your own food and riding around in a horse and buggy?
Ah, this tired response. Whether or not Corporate America blows donkey dick is not dependent on whether or not I buy a washing machine from Home Depot.
YellowKing wrote:You're lashing out at a system that has nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans, and pinning blame on a single political party for the weaknesses of a capitalistic modern society?
First, the system has *everything* to do with Democratic and Republican politicians. Second, I'm not pinning blame on a single political party. I was addressing your assertion that these people are themselves to blame.
And I'm pointing out why these same people think that Republicans are "evil", because they are the ones that are trying to perpetuate that myth (that they are themselves to blame), and that they are intentionally perpetuating that myth on behalf of their Corporate campaign donors.
YellowKing wrote:Advocating for them out of the goodness of their hearts, or because they need the votes? We can play the "intentions" game all day long, and in the end we can't prove anything either way. The only thing we can prove is cold hard statistics, and those statistics show that conservatives are more charitable.
As Zarathud pointed out, your definition of "charitable" is very narrowly defined to yield the result that you seek. Conservatives (who tend to be more religious) tend to donate more money to charity (most likely their church). I wouldn't be surprised by that, I would expect it.
But I don't think that it's a particular good benchmark for who "cares more about the downtrodden" (which was what we were talking about).
When it comes to politicians, I don't think any of them are genuine. When it comes to liberals vs. conservatives (the People), I think that the picture is just a bit bigger than who writes the biggest checks (for the reasons Zarathud suggests).
There's a pretty good chance that we will vote the same way in November, but I'll be honest - it's thoroughly depressing that you've so willingly pulled the wool back down over your eyes in the past three years. I can get massive disappointment in Obama. I can get holding my nose and voting against him. But to just go right back to parroting the same, tired Republican propaganda, as if you never saw the man behind the curtain?
I don't get it.